Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Let's go!
You get to use both ends : including the one to remove boy scouts from horses' hooves, and I only get to use the pointy end!
The thing I said about "messing about", goes double. If the butt-end was truly important there wouldn't be a plethora of funky styles.

Let's go!
You get to use both ends : including the one to remove boy scouts from horses' hooves, and I only get to use the pointy end!
The thing I said about "messing about", goes double. If the butt-end was truly important there wouldn't be a plethora of funky styles.

What is the expression? Better to be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. No thanks, you apparently already know all you will ever know about yari and how they were actually used.

Let's go!
You get to use both ends : including the one to remove boy scouts from horses' hooves, and I only get to use the pointy end!
The thing I said about "messing about", goes double. If the butt-end was truly important there wouldn't be a plethora of funky styles.

Mr. Douglas,

My experience includes some background in aikiken and aikijo from several different lineages -- mind you, I'm not claiming exhaustive mastery of those usages, just enough experience to recognize a few commonalities -- as well as sword and polearms in two distinct koryu. Additionally, I've been fortunate enough to observe a number of public and private presentations of other koryu in which I don't actively train. I have certainly experienced wide variations of training methods and goals within aiki-buki practice, and even broader variations across multiple koryu. In the former case, these differences are associated with individual instructors working off a somewhat common base of material. In the latter case, the differences are associated with a much broader range of factors -- historical era in which the school arose, social class of practitioners then and now, geographic location of practitioners, and primary focus of the school, to name but a few.

Some older schools are dedicated exclusively to the practice of one weapon, others address usage of multiple weapons while retaining a primary orientation toward one of those weapons. Some koryu schools (or lineages within larger groupings) retain a combative sensibility, others are more in the nature of cultural preservation societies. All of this makes generalization rather difficult.

But that said, I can assure you from personal experience that a polearm in the right hands is not a mullet -- business in front and party in the rear -- and that entering into an engagement with the assumption that it is such leaves one quite literally open to some exceedingly ugly possibilities.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that, as many direct students of the Founder have repeatedly told -- and continue to tell -- their students, aikijo and aikiken are not intended as strictly combative systems, but rather, are intended to provide a medium for teaching a range of principles, not least of them reinforcing the basic patterns of body movement taught in this or that group or aikidoka.

As the late Sugano Sensei once said in response to a query about why he didn't emphasize sword (or more broadly, "weapons") as a part of his instruction, "if you want mochi, go to the mochi maker."

This seems to me a much sounder proposition than making assumptions and pronouncements regarding the nature of polearm combatives on the basis of experience with a system of movement with sticks which has been designed to emphasize -- according to its disseminators -- something other than a strictly combative purpose.

Of course, we all have a natural tendency to relate anything new that we encounter to something we already know, in which regard your observations about the lack of efficacy of the butt end of the stick may be accurate -- based solely on your prior experience.

Forgive me if I've belabored the point, but it is also my experience that the tendency of many aikido practitioners toward unwarranted assumptions that one's experience in aikido provides a sound guide to judgment regarding the principles underlying older combative systems, or the expression of those principles in particular patterns of movement or other elements of technical application, has resulted in a noticeable reluctance on the part of a number of licensed koryu instructors to accept students with a background in aikido. This seems to me an unfortunate, but understandable, situation; whatever your own personal training goals, please give a moment's thought to the possibility that ill-considered statements such as yours might not only be merely wrong, but may themselves cause difficulties to other aikido practitioners with rather less unwarranted certainty about the scope of their own knowledge and rather more curiosity about approaches to budo and bujutsu that predate the development of aikido as a gendai budo.

...please give a moment's thought to the possibility that ill-considered statements such as yours might not only be merely wrong, but may themselves cause difficulties to other aikido practitioners with rather less unwarranted certainty about the scope of their own knowledge and rather more curiosity about approaches to budo and bujutsu that predate the development of aikido as a gendai budo.

Best regards,

FL

This is something I've run in to first hand. I was at a private training session a while back by the invite of the head guy. One fella on the mat with me who didn't know me asked where I was from and what I studied. I said Aikido. He looked at me funny and another nearby student on the floor said "Don't worry, Keith's okay, he's not like most Aikido guys..." It is a sad commentary on how Aikido is viewed outside the Aikido community that I realized that was a compliment.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that, as many direct students of the Founder have repeatedly told -- and continue to tell -- their students, aikijo and aikiken are not intended as strictly combative systems, but rather, are intended to provide a medium for teaching a range of principles, not least of them reinforcing the basic patterns of body movement taught in this or that group or aikidoka.

As the late Sugano Sensei once said in response to a query about why he didn't emphasize sword (or more broadly, "weapons") as a part of his instruction, "if you want mochi, go to the mochi maker."

This seems to me a much sounder proposition than making assumptions and pronouncements regarding the nature of polearm combatives on the basis of experience with a system of movement with sticks which has been designed to emphasize -- according to its disseminators -- something other than a strictly combative purpose.

I absolutely agree.
You wrote a good piece, and there is nothing within it I have any issue with.
My original comment was specific and the words were carefully chosen.

But seriously: Do these kata contradict your original comment or do I misunderstand you, are you talking about something different?

Yeah, I'm talking about something different.
Thanks for the links, the iaido vid is beside the point,
the other one (Kendo world video?) is decent kata, with that one butt-strike in for interest, but they both (in my own mind) reinforce my original point.
Now please dig out some videos of the guys in white sparring with identical dummy spears (yes those LONG ones they were using for the kata demo) and see if a butt-strike is ever used. not kata, actual competitive sparring.
I had a go but couldn't find Aikiso in a Kendo stylee.
(Found some Naginata, but oh my god what is the ruleset for that awfulness?)

Now here is a man with conviction. Despite subject matter experts rejecting your points with prejudice, you challenge Keith to a death match and double down on your mistaken ideas.

i can see myself agree with Michael about the spear. if i wield a spear, i would definitely spend 99% of the time using the business end to shish kebab the other buggers. maybe once in a blue moon, i would use the butt end to knock the other bugger out and take his wallets. kill a man and you can only rob him once. knock him out, you can rob him many times. it calls investment for the future. it's one of the reason why i don't use spear, but a weed whacker.

Did you acutally see the sojutsu kata in what you call "iaido vid"?
Did you recognize the ishizuki of their yari?
Did you notice how they use it?

If so: Why do you think this to be beside the point?
If not: Does a second look change your opinion about the vid?

Quote:

... Kendo world ...

Your talking of "... iaido vid ...", "... kendo world ... " and "competitive sparring" makes me wonder whether your statment is acutally based in practicing any koryû sojutsu?
I apologize for the question, but my English simply is not good enough so that I could differentiate here between someone just using easy language and someone who is not really at home in the subject.

Quote:

Now please dig out some videos of the guys in white sparring with identical dummy spears (yes those LONG ones they were using for the kata demo) and see if a butt-strike is ever used. not kata, actual competitive sparring.

I found some randori.
Folk please watch this, to my eyes this is more relevant to the argument between me and a few others in this thread than the two kata vids posted by Carstenhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN2g-hD_dSw
If either of the two combatants took time to use the butt they would be shishkebabed.
It can happen, sure, but that would amount to messing about.

And

Quote:

Carsten Möllering wrote:

Your talking of "... iaido vid ...", "... kendo world ... "

"Kendo World" is plastered across the base of the video and you're asking me if I watched it!?
I had another quick look at the iaido vid, and sure, its an iaijutsu vid, my bad.
Still just kata.

I found some randori.
Folk please watch this, to my eyes this is more relevant to the argument between me and a few others in this thread than the two kata vids posted by Carstenhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN2g-hD_dSw
If either of the two combatants took time to use the butt they would be shishkebabed.
It can happen, sure, but that would amount to messing about.

And

"Kendo World" is plastered across the base of the video and you're asking me if I watched it!?
I had another quick look at the iaido vid, and sure, its an iaijutsu vid, my bad.
Still just kata.

The spear was a battlefield weapon.

You are standing on a battlefield and you have a spear (maybe you just finished skewering the guy in front of you) and an enemy is coming up behind you.

If I am correctly reading Michael's comments, his critical opinion is a disconnect between kata and application, his argument being that transitioning the butt to the front would be less effective than maintaining the spearhead in front. If that's the case, I get where he is coming from. I think this critical observation is consistent with similar observations that kata may not match application. I can think of several military tactics of group deployment that would discourage this transition. But, I am not sure Chris is claiming he is working on battlefield tactics, nor that his kata are transferrable.

I have given up claiming to have any knowledge about actual weapons work. I've had my piece of humble pie just talking and interacting with some great individuals who work on this stuff. There are reasons for battlefield movement. I remember reading a history of warfare that referred to the importance of selecting a battlefield and positioning your troops with the wind to your back to cut the range of projectile weapons. Or the sun to your back. Or elevated ground. I remember talking to someone who advocated the sword entering the body only a few inches, the additional length simply taking longer to stick in and pull out (thus creating a greater duration of vulnerability). I think we are narrowly defining a greater spectrum of knowledge, which maybe could be better worded in criticism.

I think there is nothing wrong claiming what works and what doesn't, but that is a different argument in my mind. Most judo players competitively throw 3-5 throws, yet that does not discredit the collection of judo throws available for training. Rather, it simply highlights a group of throws more effective to the competitive environment.

I met Nolan Ryan as a [very] young pitcher. I asked him how to throw a curve ball like he did. He asked if I had a pretty good fastball. I said, "yes." He said, "then why do you need to throw a curveball?" Talking some of that advice, I often pitched predominantly fastballs until the hitters proved able to hit me. If Michael is simply claiming that the thrust is the predominant application of the spear, I can understand that perspective since I often held the same opinion in my athletics.

To Fred's point (and Keith's), I followed this thread with trepidation that someone who knows this stuff is simply going to read these comments and sigh. Michael, I read a lot of these posts as requests to clarify the scope of your point and not necessarily adversarial to your point. I think your recent confirmation to Carsten about the point you are trying to make may be a greater observation to re-state your claim, if you want to. To be honest, I am applying an conditional statement to my understanding of what you said...

Owari Kan Ryu is a very formidable -- and distinctive -- system of sojutsu, not least because of its use of (among a number of types of spear) a kuda-yari, or a spear with a sleeve on the shaft, typically held with the distal hand, and allowing the trained exponent to repeatedly thrust (while maintaining control of the spear) at a much higher rate than is possible with a standard spear. So much faster, in fact, that it compares to a standard spear in much the same way that a semi-automatic rifle compares with a bolt action rifle. That speed is what is visible in the clip cited above.

These features (along with a number I'm won't belabor her) limit the utility of generalizations made -- to all systems of spear -- from observation of a few minutes of a public presentation of Owari Kan Ryu basic randori training. Nonetheless,while I'm not sure I would relish even a friendly engagement with a trained exponent of Owari Kan Ryu, I am sure that if it came to that, I might well try one or more things intended to direct the tip somewhere far, far away from my own torso -- but even then, I wouldn't dare presume that my opponent hasn't also received adequate training how to use the ishizuki should the need present itself.

Another short example of Hozoin Ryu Sojutsu, using another somewhat unusual spear, the kagi-yari, i.e. a yari with a cross-piece. The name of the form? E-gaeshi. A number of features definitely depend on the kagi, but not all:

Owari Kan Ryu is a very formidable -- and distinctive -- system of sojutsu, not least because of its use of (among a number of types of spear) a kuda-yari, or a spear with a sleeve on the shaft, typically held with the distal hand, and allowing the trained exponent to repeatedly thrust (while maintaining control of the spear) at a much higher rate than is possible with a standard spear. So much faster, in fact, that it compares to a standard spear in much the same way that a semi-automatic rifle compares with a bolt action rifle. That speed is what is visible in the clip cited above.

No it isn't - faster. (shock horror again?)
The clip I linked to (the first one I found showing competition) shows normal speed from two fairly fit guys using spears in theirs hands as usual : if they turn out to have had tubes ... it still looks perfectly normal to me, and identical to my use of a normal spear without a tube. It is fast. Fast is normal. Fast is necessary.
They look like I'd expect them to look, they look like they are doing effective spear combat with safety measures. No more no less, this stuff is universal.

Just fwiw for trivia buffs. Dusted this off in my workshop last night and took a quick photo. Ishizuki made of solid iron from a broken yari pole. Notice the end for straight thrusts. And notice the way the object is made for highly focused strikes from the side. And also the weight is significant. That would leave a mark.

Again, just fwiw for those interested in an example. No need to rehash the conversation. Just what we in the biz like to call "sword porn". Pretty pictures. In this case, fairly mundane, actually, but it does make a point...

And as an interesting side note, a friend sent me this... European Mace. Notice the design and similarities. The use of the finial as a end point and then the flanges. And these maces were most certainly intended to be used as impact weapons. Just fwiw.